A prior art example of a press machine 1 to which the present invention relates is shown in FIG. 1. A frame 2 of the press machine 1 is C-shaped in side elevational view, and has a lower jaw portion with a bed 4 supported thereon, and an upper jaw portion with a slide 5 and a driving unit for driving the slide 5 supported thereon. The arrangement is made such that when the slide 5 is lowered by rotation of a main spindle, a workpiece (not shown) positioned on a lower die 7 mounted on a bolster 4a resting on the bed 4 is punched by an upper die (punch) 6 fixedly secured to the slide 5. In FIG. 1, reference numeral 3 denotes a front side plate of the frame, and reference numeral 8 denotes a side frame.
In the above-mentioned prior art press machine 1, to suppress or reduce the vibration of the frame 2 or the level of noise generated by the press, for example, either (1) a vibration damping material is mounted on the surface of the frame, or (2) the whole press machine is surrounded by a box to isolate the noise. (Refer, for example, to "Examples of Measures for controlling Noise generated by Press Machines", collection of lectures and thesis on technique presentation conferences issued by Japanese Noise Control Engineering Society, P141, Sept., 1989).
Further, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, a third prior art alternative (3) for reducing or suppressing the vibration of the frame or the level of noise generated includes mounting an L-shaped reinforcing plate-shaped member 9 on the inner surface of each of the side frames 8.
The problem with mounting a vibration damping material on the surface of the frame, as in the above-mentioned case (1), is that it causes an increase in the weight and cost of the entire press machine. For effective vibration damping, the thickness of the vibration damping material must be at least equal to or more than that of the frame, so that if the thickness of the frame is 22 mm, for example, then the total thickness of the frame and the vibration damping material becomes about 50 mm, thus increasing the weight of the entire press machine, giving disadvantages in tens of cost and practicality.
Further, where the whole press machine is surrounded by a box, as in the above-mentioned case (2), other problems exist relating to press operation, cost and the need for increased working space in factories.
Still further, in the above-mentioned alternative (3), as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, because the plate-shaped member 9 is fixedly secured to each of the side frames 8 as the reinforcing member thereof, the reinforcing effect for preventing the opening formed between the upper and lower jaws of the frame from flaring was limited. Further, the prior art reinforcing member 9 mounted on the side frames 8 so as to extend upwards from the upper jaw portion is inefficient as a reinforcing member since only a small loading is applied to this portion.